You are here

Archived: Moor House Residential Care Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 7 October 2017

Moor House Residential Care Home is a 24 bedded residential care home. There were 20 people living at the home on the day of our inspection.

At the last inspection on 19 March 2015 the service was rated ‘Good.’ At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good.’

People continued to be kept safe at Moor House Residential Care Home because staff were knowledgeable about the signs of abuse and the processes to follow when they suspected abuse. The provider continued to follow safe recruitment practices that ensured only suitable staff were employed at the home. Risk assessments were in place that enabled people to remain safe and provided guidance to staff about the risks and how to maintain people’s safety. Records of accidents and incidents were maintained and actions to help to prevent the re-occurrence of these had been implemented. There were sufficient numbers of staff to attend to the needs of people. Medicines were managed and stored safely and people received their medicines on time and as prescribed by their GP.

Staff continued to receive training, regular supervision (one to one meeting) and annual appraisals that helped them to perform their duties. Where there were restrictions in place, staff had followed the legal requirements to make sure this was done in the person’s best interests. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure decisions were made for people in the least restrictive way. Staff supported people to eat a variety of freshly prepared foods and all dietary requirements were met. People had access to all external healthcare professionals and their involvement was sought by staff to help maintain good health.

Staff showed kindness and compassion to people and respected people’s privacy and dignity. People were able to choose how they spent their time, could freely access all communal areas of the home and their personal care needs were attended to in private. People’s relatives and visitors were welcomed and there were no restrictions of times of visits.

Documentation that enabled staff to support people and to record the care they had received was up to date and continued to be regularly reviewed. People and their relatives were involved in the reviewing of their care. People took part in a variety of activities that interested them. A complaints procedure was available to people, relatives and visitors. Complaints received had been resolved in accordance with provider’s complaints policy.

Staff and the provider undertook quality assurance audits to ensure the care provided was of a standard people should expect. The provider had an effective system in place to monitor the quality of care and treatment provided at the home. People and staff were provided with opportunities to put forward their views about how the home was run during residents, relatives and staff meetings.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 7 October 2017

The service remains Good.

Staff were knowledgeable about the process to be followed if they suspected or witnessed abuse.

There were sufficient staff deployed at the home to meet people�s needs.

Risks to individual people had been identified and written guidance for staff about how to manage risks was being followed.

Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored by staff at the home to help minimise the risk of repeated events.

The provider had carried out full recruitment checks to ensure staff were safe to work at the service.

People�s medicines were managed, stored and administered safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 October 2017

The service remains Good.

Staff received appropriate training and had opportunities to meet with their line manager regularly to receive one to one support.

Where people�s liberty was restricted or they were unable to make decisions for themselves, staff had followed legal guidance.

People were involved in choosing the food they ate and alternative meals were provided.

People had involvement from healthcare professionals as and when required and staff to supported people to remain healthy.

Caring

Good

Updated 7 October 2017

The service remains Good.

Staff respected people�s privacy and dignity and made them feel that they mattered.

Staff were very caring, kind and supportive people to be independent.

Relatives and visitors were welcomed and able to visit the home at any time.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 October 2017

The service remains Good.

Staff responded well to people�s needs or changing needs and care plans were written with people and their relatives.

People had opportunities to take part in activities that interested them.

Information about how to make a complaint was available for people and their relatives.

Well-led

Good

Updated 7 October 2017

The service remains Good.

The registered manager worked closely with external agencies to promote good outcomes for people.

Quality assurance checks were completed to help ensure the care provided was of good quality. There was a system in place to ascertain the views of people about the care and support they received from the service.

There was a registered manager in post and a staff structure where everyone was aware of their roles. The registered manager led by example and promoted and respected people�s end of life wishes.

Staff felt supported by the registered manager who had an open door policy.

The provider sought the views of people, relatives and staff about how the home should be run.